Is there no lie too big or too small that Liberal party ministers, candidates or supporters will not utter in the 2016 Australian federal election campaign?

This was Australian Attorney-General and Liberal Senator for Queensland George Brandis as reported by ABC News on 15 May 2016:

In 2009 Peta Murphy was among a group of lawyers who made a submission to parliament urging the Government to deny police and the domestic spy agency ASIO stronger powers to detain terror suspects without charge.

Attorney General George Brandis said he was "very alarmed" at Ms Murphy's stance and demanded Mr Shorten immediately dump her as Labor's candidate.

"That submission was made a matter of weeks after it was disclosed that the Al-Shabaab terrorist group had been engaged in a plan to attack the Holsworthy Barracks in Sydney," he told reporters.

"It is shocking that the Labor candidate … should be a person who, within weeks of people being charged for an attempted terrorist strike against an Australian military base, should be calling into question both whether or not Al-Shabaab should be listed as a terrorist organisation, which she did, and whether we should have specific anti-terrorism laws, which she also did."

The Australian Financial Review added further detail:

In 2009, Ms Murphy was a signatory on a submission by Liberty Victoria sent to then Labor attorney-general Robert McClelland calling on him to deny the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation and the police stronger powers to detain ­terror suspects without charge.

So what did Ms. Murphy sign that was supposedly so shocking?

On 25 June 2009 the Senate referred the private member’s bill Anti-Terrorism Laws Reform Bill 2009 for inquiry and report.

In August 2009 three men were arrested and charged with terrorism offences committed between 1 February and 4 August that year. At that time Al-Shabaab was not listed as a terrorist organisation by the Australian Government [See Fattal & Ors v The Queen [2013] VSCA 276]. These men were not brought to trial until mid-2010.

The submission to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Committee George Brandis was referring to appears to be one submitted by the 77 year-old advocacy group Liberty Victoria (Victorian Council of Civil Liberties Inc.) on 9 September 2009 which was co-signed by Peta Murphy as a council committee member.

It was the only submission made by Liberty Victoria to the Inquiry into the Anti-Terrorism Laws Reform Bill 2009 and it comprised two pages in length.

None of the other 2009 archived submissions* listed on the Liberty Victoria website which address national anti-terrorism legislation carry her name as a specific co-signatory.

Currently Ms.Murphy is a Labor candidate in the Dunkley electorate and is a barrister who has worked at the Victorian Law Reform Commission, as a Senior Public Defender for Legal Aid and as an adviser in the Australian Parliament. 

To understand what an incredible distortion of fact the accusations made by George Brandis are, here is that Liberty Victoria submission in full:

Victorian Council of Civil Liberties Inc. submission on Anti-Terrorism Laws Reform Bill 2009, dated 9 Septe... by clarencegirl

* One other 2009 submission by Liberty Victoria sent on 25 September to the Assistant Secretary, Security Law Branch, Attorney-General’s Department referred in part to the same private member's bill and was signed not by Ms.Murphy, but solely by the then president of the Victorian Council of Civil Liberties. It can be viewed here.

Conservative ideologues, bankers and employers determined to have their way on wages, unions & industry not-for-profit super funds

Australian unions, the successful not-for-profit super funds they administer and enterprise agreements are all well and truly in the firing line as Australia enters the 2016 election year.

The Australian, 11 January 2016:

A new clash is looming over rules that can ban millions of workers from choosing their own retirement fund as the government tries to increase choice in the $2 trillion superannuation industry.

Despite fears it will be accused of running an “ideological” campaign against funds that are backed by unions, the Coalition will move to scrap a key part of the industrial relations regime that gives unions and employers the right to limit fund choice for up to 4.7 million workers.

The push sets up a new fight in the Senate after parliament resumes within weeks, but armed with a warning from trade union royal commissioner Dyson Heydon against the “tyranny of the majority” being allowed to dictate where workers put their retirement savings, the government will insist that the choice of fund cannot remain a bargaining chip in workplace deals.

Assistant Treasurer Kelly O’Dwyer will make the issue one of four major changes to the superannuation sector this year in a reform plan that appears certain to deepen the divisions in the fund ­industry while sparking renewed objections from Labor.

Ms O’Dwyer told The Aus­tralian a government analysis indicated that 26 per cent of enterprise bargaining agreements gave workers no choice of super fund and another 5 per cent allowed only limited choice. “We think that everyone should have a choice about where their money goes — after all, it’s their superannuation, it’s their retirement,” she said. “That money should be provided to a fund of their choice.”

At stake is control of tens of billions of dollars that flow into super funds every year from employee pay packets under terms negoti­ated by unions and employers in more than 20,000 enterprise agreements that cover 40 per cent of the nation’s workforce.

The move opens a new front in attempts to overhaul the wider super system after Ms O’Dwyer last month failed to persuade crossbench sen­ators to legislate governance changes that would require all funds to appoint independent directors.

Labor and the unions have claimed the Coalition is seeking to undermine the not-for-profit industry funds set up by employer groups and unions decades ago, and which often have the advantage of being named in EBAs or as the “default” option in industrial awards……

Excerpts from Prime Minster Malcolm Bligh Turnbull, Attorney-General George Brandis and Minister for Employment Michaelia Cash, Joint Media Release - Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption Final Report, 30 December 2015:

Today the Government announces that it will re-introduce legislation to re-establish the Australian Building and Construction Commission in the first sitting week of 2016 and will seek to have it passed by both chambers before the end of March…..

The Government will therefore introduce additional legislation to further strengthen the Registered Organisation Commission [previously rejected by the Senate].

Taskforce Heracles - the existing Federal and State Police Taskforce attached to the Royal Commission - will be funded to continue its work investigating referrals [from the Royal Commission into Union Governance & Corruption].

Seven News, 27 December 2015:

Business groups say a cut to Sunday penalty rates is now inevitable despite a potential backlash at the next federal election.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 22 December 2015:

National Pharmacies is attempting to cut pharmacists' penalty rates by as much as 50 per cent for certain hours on Saturday shifts. Double-time Sunday rates would remain in place.

The company also wants to lower overtime pay, freeze the wages of existing pharmacists and introduce a two-tiered pay scheme that would slash the wages of new employees, according to the union.

The union, Professional Pharmacists Australia, estimates the proposed cuts could trim new pharmacists' pay cheques by up to $10,000 a year…..

"The company is disappointed that enterprise agreement negotiations have failed to reach agreement,….

Liberal Party member & IPA Deputy Executive Director James Paterson appearing on Sky News on18 December 2015:

https://youtu.be/pjllmNzGoVU

As to be expected, far-right Institute of Public Affairs' propaganda deliberately forgets to mention that 87.6 per cent of public servants have a base salary which is less than $80k, as well as failing to mention that almost half of all public servants receive an employer superannuation contribution below the 15.4 per cent quoted by Paterson. See Australian Public Service Commission's 2014 remuneration survey.

Is Prime Minister Abbott so desperate to control the message and lift his flagging polls that he risks alienating Australian mainstream media?

This was how The Australian commenced its 5 January 2015 article about Prime Minister Abbott’s latest public relations misstep:

TONY Abbott’s office has triggered frustrations with the media by excluding a TV crew from the Prime Minister’s sudden visit to Baghdad, limiting access to his speech to Australian troops and joint statement with his Iraqi counterpart.

A camera crew sent by the major TV networks was left in Dubai when Mr Abbott flew into Iraq with his personal staff, forcing the media to rely on footage provided by the Prime Minister’s office.

This is how individual journalists reacted to the unannounced Iraq trip on Twitter:

What Iraqi News knew on 29 December 2014:

(IraqiNews.com) On Monday, the official government spokesman, Saad Hadithi revealed that the Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott plans to visit Baghdad in the coming days, while noting that Abbott will discuss with Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi the support and the equipment of security forces to confront the organization of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

Hadithi said in an interview for IraqiNews.com, “Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott will visit Baghdad in the coming days to meet with President Minister Haider al-Abadi to discuss military cooperation between the two countries.”

He added, “Abbott will discuss with al-Abadi the subject of development, training and equipping of security forces with weapons and ammunition,” adding that, “Australia has shown its willingness to provide military support to Iraq to face the terrorist gangs of ISIS.”

This is part of the 5 January speech Australian journalists were not allowed to hear as it happened:

This is my first visit to Baghdad. It is my first visit to Iraq.

Iraq is a country which has suffered a very great deal. First, decades of tyranny under Saddam Hussein. Then, the chaos and confusion that followed the American-led invasion. Most recently, the tumult, the dark age, which has descended upon Northern Iraq as a result of the Daesh death cult, but Australia will do what we can to help.

These are some of the images of varying quality which Team Abbott appears to have released to the media and/or posted on Facebook:

These are the poor quality propaganda videos his personal media crew created:

http://youtu.be/XCrDn8j812Y  http://youtu.be/Ba4XP0rhWL0

However, the Prime Minister's attempt to control the media message was not successful as one can see from this interpretation of that 5 January speech in The Sydney Morning Herald later the same day - which contained only one mention of 'death cult' and opened with this message about a war of which he approved and agreed to Australia's participation in:

Prime Minister Tony Abbott has blasted in his strongest terms yet the US management of Iraq following the 2003 invasion, branding it a period of "chaos and confusion".

It seems the days when Abbott just had to don a helmet and flak jacket to have the media treat him like a hero have long since passed and his latest attempt to reverse the public relations situation is only making matters worse.

I imagine Jane McMillan is thankful she is on holidays and not returning to the the prime minister's office as his media chief. 

To quote Bruce Hawker writing in The Age: When a Prime Minister is on a collision course with public opinion there can only be one result.

UPDATE

Political cartoonist Alan Moir sums up what appears to be the general response, to the Prime Minister's visit to Iraq, in his latest effort for The Sydney Morning Herald on 6 January 2015:

Counter-terrorism laws according to News Corp in 2014: It's all Labor's fault!

Murdoch’s minions were in fine form in The Australian and the Herald Sun as the month began.

This piece on 2 August 2014 kicked the issue off with a fine example of mudslinging.

THE risk of terror attacks on Australian soil, including on public transport networks in capital cities, is significantly ­increased because the Gillard government downplayed a report on the dangers posed by returning home-grown jihadists.

The blunt assessment was ­issued yesterday by Anthony Whealy QC, the former judge who chaired a 2013 counter-­terrorism review and who sentenced Australian terrorist Khaled Sharrouf to five years’ jail.

He said an attack on a major railway station, such as Sydney’s Wynyard, would not take “a criminal mastermind” to engineer but could kill hundreds.

Mr Whealy, who chaired the Council of Australian Governments committee’s review of counter-terrorism legislation, said that when the report warning of serious attacks in Australia was presented to the Gillard government in March last year, it was held for two months and then quietly tabled on budget night in May.

His warning came as Tony Abbott revealed the government was considering tougher laws that could reverse the onus of proof for those returning from foreign battlefields, forcing them to explain why they had been in areas such as Syria and Iraq.

Later in the day Andrew Bolt made an attempt to whip up readers:

Labor is so in hock to Muslim voters in key marginal seats that I question whether it can be trusted with our national security.

He weighed in again with some more shock, horror, on 4 August:

Former judge Anthony Whealy QC chaired a 2013 counterterrorism review and said Labor sat on his report for two months before quietly tabling it on Budget night last year, when the media was too busy to notice.

Whealy’s report warned of exactly the threat the Abbott Government is now trying to counter, suggesting laws to force people returning from Syria and Iraq, for instance, to explain exactly what they’d been doing.

Whealy says “the response from the previous government you would have to say was slow”, but is Opposition Leader Bill Shorten embarrassed? Hell, no.

Now I recall this particular Council Of Australian Governments (COAG) report, so I was somewhat puzzled to find that my memory was playing tricks on me and that in fact what I had read was a wall-to-wall-warning to the Gillard Government of the urgent danger of home grown terrorism, which had been cravenly buried by government.

After all everyone knows News Corp never lies or gilds the lily – that its newspaper empire is a fortress of editorial integrity and journalistic ethics.

So imagine my 'surprise' when a handful of computer keystrokes brought forth this media release from May 2013:

Reviews of counter-terrorism laws released today

Posted May 14, 2013

14 May 2013

The Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus QC today tabled two important and detailed reviews of counter-terrorism and national security laws - the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) Review of Counter-Terrorism Laws and the second annual report of the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor.

“These reviews are part of the Gillard Government's commitment to protecting Australians, and ensuring national security and counter-terrorism laws are administered in a fair and balanced way,” Mr Dreyfus said.

The COAG Committee examined and made recommendations about the counter-terrorism laws enacted in the Commonwealth and the States and Territories following the 2005 London bombings.

The Independent National Security Legislation Monitor made separate recommendations about Commonwealth national security legislation, including the definition of a ‘terrorist act’, control orders, the preventative detention regime, and ASIO’s powers.

There is some overlap of the provisions that the Monitor and the COAG Review Committee reviewed.

The Government will respond to the reports following consultation with the States and Territories.

“There is no greater responsibility for a Government than protecting its national security. The Gillard Government takes National Security matters extremely seriously,” Mr Dreyfus said.

“Under Australia’s counter-terrorism framework four major terrorist attacks on Australian soil have been disrupted.

“In light of the recent terror attack in Boston, it is clear that it is as important now as it ever was to maintain strong capabilities in the fight against terrorism. Our counter-terrorism framework has held us in good stead so far, but we must remain vigilant.”

The Gillard Government created the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor to review Australia’s national security laws and counter-terrorism laws on an ongoing basis and determine whether they remain necessary, effective, proportionate and consistent with our international human rights obligations.

Both Reviews will be available online later this afternoon.

• COAG Review of Counter-Terrorism Laws
• Second annual report of the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor

While typing Mr. Whealy’s name into Google and hitting the search button produced this piece from The Australian on 17 May 2013:

Mr Whealy, who chaired the Council of Australian Governments' review of the terror laws, recommended creating a corps of security-cleared lawyers, or "special advocates", to make it easier to contest a control order.

Other recommendations included requiring the security agencies to disclose information about their concerns to subjects of control orders and easing some of the conditions.

Mr Whealy rejected suggestions the report's 47 recommendations amounted to an overall watering down of terror laws, describing them as "a calculated, contemporary assessment" of a framework enacted in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks in New York, Washington, Bali, London and Madrid.

"If the government were to adopt what we've suggested, I think the laws would be still be effective to prevent a terrorist act in Australia," he said.

Now that assessment is much closer to how I recall the COAG Review of Counter-Terrorism report and its recommendations when it was released.

I remember one recommendation that made me smile at the time -  that relevant legislation should be amended to “create exemptions for providing training to or receiving training from a terrorist organisation for purposes unconnected with the commission of a terrorist act”.  I also thought rather generous the recommendation which included the hope that lawyers in this country be allowed to receive and hold funds from terrorist organisations for legal advice/representation of these organisations on the off chance that they might be involved in future civil/criminal proceedings.

And the revelation that the report alerted the Gillard Government to a heightened level of risk?  Well that claim is apparently based primarily on an unclassified ASIO submission which merely a gave broad brush assessment to the review committee and, was very old news by then.

In fact the national terrorism alert level has been set at Medium (terrorist attack could occur) since it was introduced in 2003.

So why are News Corp journalists getting all hot under the collar now? Of course! Prime Minister Abbott’s argument that counter-terrorism legislation needs to be tightened is best framed as Fixing Labor’s Mess.

Metgasco Limited and News Corp journalist Miranda Devine distorting the truth about opposition tho the gas industry establishing itself in the Northern Rivers

Coal seam gas exploration and mining company Metgasco Limited had gone into overdrive in an attempt to negatively spin the blockade of its current drilling site at 1480 Bentley Road, Bentley.

News Corp journalist Miranda Devine took the bait and wrote about the virtual siege under which the family are allegedly living and the ‘hellish ’level of harassment being experienced.

However, the facts of the matter don’t really support the Metgasco-Devine dire version of events.

Neither Robert Graham nor Peter Graham and his wife and children live on the land in question – they live at Goolmangar - and apparently the level of personal harassment being experienced in practice is that Peter is being “barked at” as the protesters move their cars and open the gate so he can enter his land.

Excerpt from Miranda Devine’s article Fossil fuel fanatics make farm life hell posted on Metgasco Limited’s company website, 2 April 2014:

In the lush pastures of the northern rivers region, an unholy alliance of local anti-gas protesters and imported green extremists is making life hell for farmer Pete Graham and his family.

They have farmed near Casino for five generations, but their decision to allow gas company Metgasco to drill on their land for natural gas — not coal seam gas — has turned into a nightmare.

Hundreds of protesters have been camped around their property for weeks, blocking their driveways with cars and intimidating everyone going in and out. Peter’s wife, seven-year-old twins and parents are under virtual siege. His gates have been ­repeatedly padlocked and welded shut and a concrete trench with metal spikes dug into his driveway. If he takes cattle to market, he has to ask council for a security escort to get out his gate.

And in nearby Casino, business owners were harassed by anonymous letters last week, threatening a boycott of the town.

“It’s out of control,” Graham, 44, said yesterday of the campaign of intimidation.

“They’ve been told by police not to enter our property and they continually disobey the requests.”

This is the dark side of the campaign against coal seam gas. While apprehension about the impacts on prime agricultural land of gas exploration is real, extreme green fanatics have exploited those fears for their own ends.

Posing as farmer’s friends, professional vigilante activists are dangerous bedfellows for the grassroots anti-gas movement. Their criminal harassment of farmers and contractors and total opposition to all fossil fuels will, in the end, turn off the public and divide communities……

Echo NetDaily 1 April 2014:

Peter Graham has a pretty cattle stud in the valley, with a backdrop of Muckleewee Mountain Nature Reserve.

He has signed his land over to Metgasco for tight sands gas exploration and, perhaps, exploitation. Whether they are ‘successful’ or not, Mr Graham won’t have to deal with the consequences – he doesn’t live on the property.

His neighbours are not so well disposed to the idea of their green valley being turned into an industrialised gasfield: 84.5 per cent have registered their opposition to it.

The Northern Star 2 April 2014:

ROSELLA well landowner Peter Graham said protesters had now blockaded all the entrances on his cattle property and he could not enter any of the gates without harassment.

The official policy of protesters as publicised by Gasfields Free Northern Rivers is to not interfere with any farming activities on the land, but Mr Graham said the message wasn't filtering down to everyone.

Mr Graham said a few weeks ago most people would move their cars away and be "nice about it", while others would take several minutes to do so and were rude.

But recently, the tone of protesters had changed for the worse, he said.

"You drive through there and you get barked at," Mr Graham said. "We were told as we were going in - 'we know where you live - be warned'."

But one protester said that the Grahams had always been let in and they were even given photos of Robbie and Peter Graham to identify them with.

Mr Graham, who does not live at the property, said he would only visit when absolutely necessary.

NOTE: All read bolding is mine

Is much of the media coverage of Prime Minister Abbott during the October 2013 bushfires accurate, misleading or downright false?

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott was apparently ‘discovered’ almost by accident as he anonymously went about fighting NSW bushfires over the last six days:

Pictures circulating on social media show Mr Abbott riding in the fire truck and giving the thumbs up to onlookers before he posed for photos with fellow volunteers.

However, it appears that it was not just an onlooker or ordinary volunteer who snapped Abbott – it appears to have been the former Senior Studio Director at Skynews whose efforts were first tweeted via a Canberra-based political reporter at Sky News.

Here is one of the three tweeted pictures – all apparently originating in Sky News on 20 October 2013:

https://twitter.com/SkyNewsAust

Rupert Murdoch’s News Limited Network was not content with republishing these images allegedly snapped at around 8am on 20 October – it also used additional images in some of its reporting. Unfortunately those images can only be described as false reporting.

According to The Australian on 21 October 2013:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/bushfires/tony-abbott-puts-himself-in-line-of-fire/story-fngw0i02-1226743492769

According to Newzzly post two weeks and six days before that, this image actually belonged to the period covering the fire on Barrenjoey headland:

http://www.newzzly.com/en_au/n/milder-conditions-help-fire-fight/142252

This was The Daily Telegraph on 16 October 2013:

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/tony-abbott-always-set-to-come-out-fighting-fires-that-is/story-fni0cx12-1226740600883

And this is what a peek at The Daily Telegraph’s 16 October photograph properties revealed:

I am now wondering if any of the Abbott as fire fighter images, being published in mainstream and social media reports on NSW bushfires this month, are in fact genuine.

UPDATE

Found on Twitter:

Lucy J Evans is a young woman who has been active on Facebook since January-February 2012.

On 19 October 2013 The Hawkesbury Gazette published this photograph (photographer unknown) of Tony Abbott at Bilpin on its Facebook page:

This is Sally Oelerich and her views are "very much" her own

This is Sally’s Twitter account

These are two of her tweets which have been predominantly pro-mining since she began tweeting

This is the curriculum vitae she supplied to Linkin

With this job description included

And this summary

You be the judge as to whether Ms. Oelerich is being an honest tweeter or merely a paid voice for the petroleum and gas industries

And whether or not she is well-mannered or something else entirely......

1984 Newspeak lives in 21st Century Australia! There is no such thing as "coal seam gas" in the lexicon of the NSW O'Farrell Government

This move by the NSW Coalition Government would be laughable if not for the deceit behind it.

The Sydney Morning Herald 16 September 2013:

The phrase "coal seam gas" is set to be wiped from official documents in NSW and possibly across Australia as governments come under increasing pressure over the contentious energy policy area.

A leaked briefing note prepared for NSW energy and resources minister Chris Hartcher recommends the phrase and its acronym CSG be replaced with the standard term "natural gas from coal seams".

The document says the move is designed to "improve clarity and consistency of the terms used to describe coal seam gas in departmental correspondence, communication and content".

It says the change is a recommendation of the federal Standing Council on Energy and Resources, whose members include ministers from each state and territory and the commonwealth.

In May the council published a National Harmonised Regulatory Framework for Natural Gas from Coal Seams which is designed to ensure "regulatory regimes are robust, consistent and transparent across all Australian jurisdictions".

"This is part of a national harmonisation initiative adopted by all governments," the NSW briefing note says.

The note recommends that references to "coal seam gas" and "CSG" be removed "where possible" in sentences on websites and in marketing material and standard responses to letters.

In internal briefing notes "natural gas from coal seams" should be used in the first reference, it advises.

However, CSG and coal seam gas are condoned on social media to track the national debate.

"Social media relies on CSG or coal seam gas references and hashtags (ie: #CSG)," the note says.

"In order to participate and track conversations it is therefore acceptable to use CSG or coal seam gas on Twitter and Facebook. CSG is also a recognised online search term and is a relevant key work for Search Engine Optimisation (SEO). This will assist the public in finding government information on the issue".

A handwritten addition to the note says the government "will need to ensure same approach" is followed within two independent agencies, the Land and Water Commissioner and the Office of the Chief Scientist.

Thanks Rupert Murdoch, but Australians can choose their own government

http://youtu.be/grqp-JQMFuM

Australian Press Council Update 28 August 2013:

On Friday 23 August the Chair of the Council, Prof Julian Disney, wrote to major newspaper editors reminding them of the Council's longstanding guideline on election coverage. A copy of the message is below.

Dear editor,

In response to concerns expressed by members of the general community as well as within the media industry, I am writing to the editor of each metropolitan daily newspaper to emphasise the importance of the advisory guideline on election reporting. It was issued by the Press Council in 2009 and continues in operation.

In particular, I draw your attention to the 2009 opening section of the guideline which reads as follows:

“The Council upholds the right of a newspaper to have its own political position; to accept certain beliefs and policies and to reject others; and to favour the election of one party and to oppose the election of another.  However, the Council has emphasised strongly that newspapers that profess to inform the community about its political and social affairs are under an obligation to present to the public a reasonably comprehensive and accurate account of public issues. As a result, the Council believes that it is essential that a clear distinction be drawn between reporting the facts and stating opinion. A paper’s editorial viewpoints and its advocacy of them must be kept separate from its news columns.”

We seek your cooperation in observing this guideline during the current Federal election campaign. The full text is available at http://www.presscouncil.org.au/document-search/guideline-reporting-elections/

Yours sincerely,

Prof Julian Disney AO
Chair
Australian Press Council
23 August 2013

CSG industry begins to spend "multi-millions of dollars" to drown out Northern Rivers and other communities across Australia

Ad News 30 July 2013:

The peak body representing Australia's oil and natural gas producers has launched a multimillion-dollar public awareness campaign to warn of the dangers to the economy of a slowdown in the industry.

The Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association, which represents more than 80 full member companies and 250 associate member companies, kicked off the 'Our Natural Advantage' campaign last night.

A spokesperson for APPEA declined to comment on the exact amount but said the spend was "significant" and "in the multi-millions of dollars". The TV ads will be supported by print and radio……

Apparently Northern Rivers communities and residents who do not support the likes of Metgasco and ERM Power are unpatriotic and uncaring because we will not allow director-shareholders to fill their bank accounts at the expense of our own existing regional economies, amenity, lifestyle and an environmentally sustainable future for local families....

http://youtu.be/Bzm0cyJDbjU

Metgasco joins in the blamefest with an email round robin delivering this message from CEO Peter Henderson:

Metgasco Limited statement July 2013

Unfortunately for APPEA and Metgasco the Australian media is not always obliging:

Australian Financial Review Editorial & Opinion, 30 July 2013

Hartsuyker jumps on Murdoch misinformation bandwagon and rest of mainstream media fall in line behind him

This was Denis Shanahan and Jared Owens writing an ‘exclusive in The Australian on 17 July 2013:

In a rush to spend as much money as possible in marginal seats, the Rudd government has given surf lifesaving clubs 72 hours to apply for funds for "shovel-ready" projects to be announced before the election campaign…….

This was the Federal Nationals MP for Cowper, Luke Hartsuyker, hopping on the bandwagon at ABC Regional News 17 July 2013:

The Nationals member for Cowper Luke Hartsuyker said the surf club grants are blatant pork-barrelling.

"The real issue here whether this is an appropriate use of tax payers money or whether this is actually corrupt conduct," he said.

This was Luke Hartsuyker again making sure his electorate got the news on Page 5 of The Daily Examiner 18 July 2013:

Cowper MP Luke Hartsuyker came out swinging after he heard lifesaving clubs would only have three days to lodge funding applications.

"Funding for surf lifesaving clubs should be provided on the basis of need, not on the basis of getting Kevin Rudd re-elected," Mr Hartsuyker said.

"Now we have Kevin Rudd saying he will provide funds to surf lifesaving clubs on the basis of a club's location, without any consideration to a club's need or its capacity to service the local community.

"A 72-hour timeframe for all funding applications to be lodged is not the way to govern Australia."

There is one small problem with this story – it was incorrect and Surf Life Saving Australia informed the media of this at 4.27pm on 17 July 2013.

Something The Australian had to admit the next day on 18 July 2013:

SLSA released a statement confirming chief executive Greg Nance spearheaded the push "of his own initiative". "SLSA is not aware of any official federal government grant programs other than those already in the public domain," the statement said.

Mr Nance was unavailable to be interviewed.

SLSA spokesman Guy Britt declined to explain what federal funding was being sought, why the deadline was so short or whether the submissions were transmitted last night as indicated.

UPDATE:

Of course it is possible that the Member For Cowper is assigning to the Rudd Labor Government the very same motives which drove the former Howard Coalition Government (of which he was a member) in the lead up to the 9 October 2004 and 24 November 2007 federal elections.

The Sydney Morning Herald 16 November 2007:

THE Coalition used a controversial grants program to make a flurry of election-eve handouts and has funnelled millions of dollars into projects in marginal seats against departmental advice, an audit has found.

A scathing report on the Regional Partnerships Program by the Australian National Audit Office outlines a litany of grants made without proper paperwork or explanation, including many that were fast-tracked just before the last election. It found:

■ The 10 electorates that received the most funding were all held by the Coalition.

■ 55 per cent of 2004 election commitments went to marginal electorates.

■ Of 43 projects that were approved despite the department not recommending to proceed, 38 were in Coalition seats.

■ In a 51-minute spending spree in the hours before the government went into caretaker mode in 2004, the parliamentary secretary responsible for the program, De-Anne Kelly, approved 16 grants worth $3.349 million.

A long-serving official in the auditor's office told the Herald yesterday: "This is the worst thing I have ever seen."

The audit found the three ministers overseeing the program were more likely to approve grants that were not recommended by the Department of Transport and Regional Services if they went to projects in Coalition seats. Projects that were recommended by the department were more likely to be knocked back if they were in Labor seats.